Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, early in this session the majority promised to implement all the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Yesterday, the Rules Committee, which is controlled by the majority, had the opportunity to deliver on that promise by making two of my amendments to this legislation in order. It failed to do so, and the security of our rail and bus passengers and, in fact, our border security in general will be all the worse as a result.

The 9/11 Commission advised the President to direct the Department of Homeland Security to ``design a comprehensive screening system'' that would target ``particular, identifiable suspects or indicators of risk'' and give border officials ``the resources to establish that people are who they say they are, intercept identifiable suspects, and disrupt terrorist operations.'' They concluded that targeting travel is at least as powerful a weapon against terrorists as targeting their money. That is the 9/11 Commission report, recommendation 14, page 385. And it recommended that a terrorist travel intelligence collection and analysis program, which had ``produced disproportionately useful results,'' should be expanded.

The first of these amendments involved the Advance Passenger Information System, or APIS as we commonly refer to it. Today, under this program, air and sea carriers collect passenger and crew biographical data and transmit this data to Customs and Border Protection while the vessel or aircraft is en route to the United States. This is an important tool in CBP's efforts to identify suspect or high-risk passengers before, that is before, they enter the country.

As terrorists are just as capable of taking a Greyhound bus across border as they are landing at LAX, I thought that my amendment, which would have required bus and train companies transporting passengers into this country to provide the same advanced information to CBP as do the airlines, made sense. Unfortunately, the majority members in the Rules Committee did not agree.

My second amendment would have authorized the deployment of the Automated Targeting System For Passengers, or ATS-P as we refer to it. ATS-P is an intranet-based enforcement and decision support tool that is the cornerstone of all of CBP's targeting efforts at the border.

ATS-P coordinates passenger information and forms an intelligence assessment of a traveler. ATS-P then makes a simple ``yes'' or ``no'' determination on whether that international traveler should be flagged for additional screening. Once this information is received by CBP officials, these officials retain the discretion to act, or not to act, on that information. In short, ATS-P is nothing more than a tool that can help CBP determine who might be a person worthy of a follow-up interview.

Again, since we are already using this technology to screen international incoming flights, why not apply it to border crossings of trains and buses, other forms of transportation through which terrorists might try to enter the country? Why not? That was the gist of my amendment. Once more, however, the majority on the Rules Committee shot us down.

Together, APIS and the ATS-P make up the building blocks of exactly the kind of border security program recommended by the 9/11 Commission, and yet this rule prohibits our consideration of these two programs as part of our mass transit and rail security structure. The majority can talk the talk when it comes to adopting the 9/11 Commission recommendations, but by failing to implement these two amendments, it has shown that it cannot walk the walk.

Accordingly, while I know that this legislation, H.R. 1401, will do many good things, and I do support the underlying bill, I ask that you vote against this rule because it fails to address the homeland security concerns detailed in my amendments.

Thank you, Congressman Miller, for your leadership, as well as Congresswoman Berkley. I appreciate all of your leadership on this very important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I too rise today to speak in favor of H.R. 1284, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2007.

I think we all are indeed grateful for the services of our Nation's veterans. They have answered this country's call time and time again. As a matter of fact, just last week I visited a VA outpatient clinic in my own district of Allentown, Pennsylvania. I continue to be amazed by the spirit of our veterans. Many of whom I met with there were in the Vietnam War, and some of whom were still struggling with the issues that affected them since their return. But I am nevertheless amazed by their spirit.

I also recently visited the Walter Reed Army Hospital in the wake of events. But as a Nation, we are indebted to these veterans. We are indebted to them for their contributions to our freedom. We need to take every opportunity to let those veterans know that they are appreciated and that their needs will be met by a grateful government and a grateful Nation.

H.R. 1284 is an opportunity for us to help meet those needs. This bill provides for an increase in the rate of compensation for disabled veterans and in the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for their families effective December 1.

The percentage increase in these rates would be equal to the increase for Social Security benefits, which would be calculated later this year. Veterans benefits must keep up with inflation. Veterans should not have to worry about losing their standard of living just because they may be living on a fixed income.

This bill will help to accomplish that particular objective. I strongly urge the Members of this House to show their support for America's veterans by voting in favor of the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living and Adjustment Act of 2007.

Mr. Speaker, I want to especially thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) for his strong leadership on this suburban agenda. I also want to thank him, too, for arranging this opportunity for members of the Suburban Agenda Caucus to come to the floor this evening to discuss issues that are important to all Americans and not simply just people who live in the suburbs.

Every congressman or woman has a unique district with distinct interests, but we can all support an agenda that defends our children's safety, improves educational opportunities and expands access to affordable health care.

When I am at home in my district, one of the issues that I discuss with my constituents is our mutual concern for the safety of our children, both in school and on the Internet. Parents have a right to send their children to safe, drug-free schools, and we took an important step last Congress when the House passed legislation, the Student and Teacher Safety Act, that would allow States and school districts to conduct reasonable searches to ensure that our schools remain free of all weapons, dangerous materials and illegal narcotics. Parents need to know that their children are safe when they are at school.

As a father of three young children, I am particularly concerned about the threat of online predators. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports that over 50,000 predators are online at any given time and one in five children has received an unwanted online solicitation of a sexual nature. We need to be vigilant as parents by supervising our children while they are browsing the Web at home. We also must do all we can to protect our children when they are outside our supervision by preventing them from accessing social networking Web sites and chat rooms like MySpace.com at schools and in libraries unless they are under adult supervision. The Deleting Online Predators Act will give parents peace of mind by ensuring that a responsible adult is monitoring their children's Internet use at all times.

Parents in my district know that a college education will double their child's earning potential, as you just mentioned, but they worry about how they will afford to send their children to a higher education institution. It is critical that we help families start saving early to send their children to college. By passing H.R. 87 and permanently extending the 401 Kids Family Savings Accounts, or college savings accounts, parents will be able to put money aside to invest in their children's future. And I want to thank the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for her strong leadership on this issue.

Finally, one meaningful step we can take to ensure that individuals and families maintain access to affordable health care is to provide greater portability of health care coverage. Most Americans with private group health insurance are covered through an employer, coverage that is generally provided to active employees and their families. A change in an individual's work or family status can result in loss of coverage. Americans are changing jobs more than ever before, averaging nearly seven different careers over the course of their working lives.

In 1985, Congress enacted legislation we refer to as COBRA to give workers and their families who lose their health benefits the right to choose to continue coverage provided under their group health plan. Under COBRA, an employer with 20 or more employees must provide individuals and their families the option of continuing their coverage under the employer's group health insurance plan in the case of certain events such as a voluntary or involuntary job loss, reduction in the hours worked, transition between jobs, death, divorce and other life events. But in most circumstances, the coverage under COBRA is limited to 18 or 36 months. And because of this 18-month limitation, during a prolonged job search, individuals and families have to purchase expensive policies in order to maintain their quality of care or they take the risk of becoming uninsured. During times of transition, families need the certainty of knowing that they will not lose their health coverage.

Later this week I will be introducing a bill, the Health Insurance for Life Act, which will remove the 18- or 36-month limitation on COBRA coverage, giving employees the option to continue their health insurance coverage indefinitely. Knowing that they can rely on continued coverage will provide individuals and families with consistency and security as they face change and uncertainty in their lives. And I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to advance this important agenda that has been outlined by my friend and colleague, Representative Kirk of Illinois.

And, again, I do want to compliment you and applaud you on your leadership.

Yes. The gentleman is absolutely on point. The portability aspect of this legislation is absolutely

critical. When I served in my State legislature, in both the State house and the State senate, this was a common complaint I would hear from people who suffered a job loss and were at the end of their COBRA eligibility.

They were very frustrated, just for the reasons you identified, that there was a member of the family who had a particular illness and that they could not get coverage elsewhere. So COBRA was absolutely critical to them being able to provide for their families.

Remember, too, when you pay for COBRA insurance, you are basically paying the full premium. So the portability aspect and dealing with the preexisting condition is absolutely I think one of the best selling points and the most salient points of this legislation.

That is absolutely true. And particularly I would also urge anybody watching us this evening to not only look at their COBRA options, and certainly endorse this legislation, but also be aware of the fact that we have programs in this country called SCHIP for children who are uninsured, that if their children need health insurance, they may be eligible for that.

When I was in my State legislature, we passed an Adult Basic Program providing a low-cost health insurance program for adults of working age who, for whatever reasons, were out of work.

So, again, the gentleman is on point, that when people are unemployed, there are options for them in health care in many States, either through SCHIP or, like my State, Adult Basic; and I would certainly encourage people to contact my office or even their State legislator's office to seek some assistance.

Mr. Speaker, this has been a long debate. But two points must be absolutely clear at the outset. First, it is imperative that we continue to support our troops on the ground. Our servicemembers deployed to Iraq have done a magnificent job. They have performed their missions admirably, effectively, and with valor. They have done everything we have asked them to do. They have made sacrifices as have their families. They deserve our unqualified support. And as a Member of Congress, I strongly disagree with some of my colleagues who have suggested cutting off funds for our troops serving in Iraq.

A second point to be made here is that immediate withdrawal from Iraq, which has likewise been advocated by some members on the other side of the aisle, is also a bad idea. The Iraq Study Group has said that ``it would be wrong for the United States to abandon the country through a precipitate withdrawal of troops and support.'' The National Intelligence Estimate of January 2007 says that ``if Coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly during the term of this estimate, we judge that this almost certainly would lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict in Iraq.''

Religious conflict aside, there is another reason for avoiding immediate withdrawal, and that is simply that al Qaeda and its affiliated groups still operate in Iraq. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's chief deputy, considers their efforts in Iraq to be ``crucial'' towards furthering al Qaeda objectives in the region. Thus, these groups are aggressively pursuing terrorism within the borders of that country, commiting acts of violence against Shias, Kurds and anyone else who dares to disagree with them.

By instigating this mayhem and bloodshed in Iraq, al Qaeda hopes to realize its supreme goal, to destabilize the government, assume control over the country and its oil wealth and eventually install a Taliban- style government in Baghdad. This is not good for the United States. It is not good for Iraq. And it is not good for the region. That is why I oppose immediate withdrawal.

That being said, and understanding the need for Congress to debate the issue of the war, I am disappointed in the way this debate has taken shape. The majority has given much time for us to express our views, but it has limited the options that might be employed to make this legislation more effective. They allowed no amendments either from Republicans or from their own Democratic colleagues. They refused to permit any substitutes. They even denied us a motion to recommit.

By putting before us this highly restrictive rule, the other side has effectively foreclosed dialogue on other measures that might have added substance to the debate. While both Democrats and Republicans utilize the Iraq Study Group findings to justify their positions, the majority leadership has refused to consider my colleague from Virginia's legislation, Mr. Frank Wolf, his legislation, H. Con. Res. 45, which would implement some of the most significant recommendations of the Iraq Study Group's report. This legislation would emphasize the need for U.S. forces to accelerate the training of their Iraqi counterparts, would establish milestones for success in Iraq, and would promote diplomatic initiatives in order to advance stability in the country and in the region.

Yet no debate on such a bill and no opportunity to offer an amendment consistent with those objectives was tolerated by the majority. What does this say about their commitment to fulfilling the objectives recommended by the Iraq Study Group's report? You know, we are all speaking about this report, but we are simply not voting on it. That is wrong.

I stand before you today in my second term in Congress as someone who has tried to understand the Iraq war from many different viewpoints. I have talked with my constituents both pro and con about the war. I have listened to military and intelligence briefings. I have visited Iraq. I have studied the Iraq Study Group report. I have read journal articles, academic studies and news clips on the subject, all to increase my professional awareness of what is going on over there.

But I do not just see this from a professional perspective. The Iraq war has had personal consequences for me as well. One of my staffers, Jason Lane, is a Reservist who has been called to active duty and is deployed there right now.

I have talked with the troops who have served there. I have visited the wounded in hospitals and most painfully attended the funerals of those who gave to this country what Abraham Lincoln called the last full measure of devotion. I attended one of those funerals just last Friday.

From all of this, I must admit, I have my concerns about the efficacy of the President's troop surge. I believe that it is far more important that the Iraqis

show the political will to achieve reconciliation and end the sectarian violence that is slowly but surely strangling their capital and their country.

As their Prime Minister, Maliki said on November 27, 2006, ``The crisis is political, and ones who can stop the cycle of aggravation and the bloodletting of innocents are the politicians.''

Success in Iraq is essential to achieving America's foreign policy objectives, and it is in America's best interest to ensure that Iraq can sustain, govern and defend itself. But I believe in holding Prime Minister Maliki to his word. We cannot and will not abandon our troops who are currently on the ground in Iraq.

We must make sure that our forces effectively engage al Qaeda, as opposed to mediating a Sunni-Shia conflict that is the responsibility of the Iraqi government to resolve. We all know these are the challenges facing this Congress, and these are challenges that must be met in a bipartisan manner.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that it be considered at any point in the reading.

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 547, the Advanced Fuels Infrastructure Research and Development Act, is an important bill that seeks to facilitate the development of markets for biofuels and ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel. I am pleased that it is being considered on the floor today.

I supported this language last year when it passed as part of the Alternative Energy Research and Development Act. I am a strong supporter of diversifying our Nation's fuel supply. Our dependence on foreign sources of petroleum is a threat to our economy, threat to our national security, and a threat to our environment.

Promoting the development and implementation of clean domestic sources of transportation fuels will advance our energy independence and reduce the detrimental environmental effects of harmful air emissions. Bio-based fuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel, are an important component of a national energy strategy, which maximizes our domestic resources.

I also believe that hydrogen must play a prominent role in an energy policy that relieves our dependence on foreign sources of oil and minimizes the environmental footprint by improving air quality and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill will direct the development of additives, blendstocks, technologies and methods which mitigate the negative effect of biofuels on infrastructure and make them more compatible with existing infrastructure used to store and deliver petroleum-based fuels to the point of final sale.

My amendment seeks to acknowledge and address the infrastructure challenges that will be presented by the advancement of hydrogen fuel, which can be made from a variety of feedstocks, including biomass. Specifically, my amendment will, one, direct the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, to consider the challenges for design, reforming storage, handling and dispensing hydrogen fuel from various feedstocks, including biomass.

I believe that key to our energy security is a strategy which incorporates the various technologies and alternative fuels that will coexist in the marketplace.

As we address the important infrastructure challenges raised by the promotion of biofuels and ultra-low sulfur diesel, I also believe it is incumbent upon us to start paving the way for the hydrogen economy. These are consistent technologies that are complementary and that promote alternative development.

Mr. Chairman, I do have a great deal of respect for the chairman, but I do respectfully disagree with his contention that this amendment is outside the scope of this legislation.

Clearly the Chair and the Parliamentarian have ruled this amendment germane. And it is germane for a number of reasons. Specifically, biomass is a feedstock, as we know. It can be used in the production of hydrogen. So I am trying to emphasize once again that these are very consistent technologies.

There is $10 million authorized in this legislation. We just seek to take some of that funding for this amendment. We are not asking for additional funding. Again, as you develop an infrastructure for biomass and biodiesel, developing one for hydrogen is just as essential.

I think that this is entirely consistent, well within the scope of the legislation before us and should be supported by all of the Members of this Chamber. I do have a great deal of respect for the gentleman from Tennessee. I know he is dedicated to alternative fuel development.

But I think we cannot move forward on some aspects of alternative fuels while ignoring hydrogen in a hydrogen-based economy, which is where many of us would like to move at some point in the future.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment says that the funding is through the EPA with consultation with the Secretary of Energy.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the life of a national treasure, Sarkis Acopian. Mr. Acopian died on January 18, 2007, at his home in Palmer Township, Pennsylvania, which is located in my Congressional district near the City of Easton. He was 80 years old.

To say that Mr. Acopian lived a full life does not do justice to the legacy of this extraordinary man. His is, in part, the classic immigrant success story. He was born on December 8, 1926, in Tabriz, Iran, to Armenian parents. He came to this country in 1945 to study engineering at Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania. While here, Mr. Acopian was drafted into the United States Army. After completing his military service, Mr. Acopian returned to Lafayette, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree in mechanical engineering in 1951.

Mr. Acopian used his prodigious intellectual gifts and business acumen to design and build things that helped to make people's lives better. While working for the Weller Electric Corporation, he designed a power sander which became one of the company's main products. After forming the Acopian Technical Company in 1957, he designed and manufactured the first ever solar radio. Mr. Acopian subsequently led his company into the power supply business, and the company, which is still operating today, became and remains quite successful in that enterprise.

But Sarkis Acopian was much, much more than just an outstanding entrepreneur. In that regard, he loved outdoor venture and throughout his life he

was an avid pilot, scuba diver and skydiving enthusiast who made more than 200 jumps during the 1960s. But where he really made his presence known was in his philanthropic work.

Mr. Acopian was a self-effacing man who believed passionately in supporting the community quietly but with unmatched generosity. He was passionate about education. He made significant donations to Columbia University, to the Acopian Engineering Center at Lafayette College and to the Acopian Center for Ornithology at Muhlenberg College located in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

He was passionate about his faith, building the Saint Sarkis Armenian Apostolic Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and giving generously to the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America and the Armenian Apostolic Church of America, as well as to local churches in Armenia.

He was passionate about nature, creating the Acopian Center for Conservation Learning at Hawk Mountain Sanctuary and the Acopian Bog Turtle Preserve, as well as endowing the environmental education program at the American University of Armenia and the Florida Institute of Technology.

He was passionate about the locality in which he lived, Easton, Easton, Pennsylvania. He gave generously to the Children's Home of Easton, a sanctuary for underprivileged youth. The State Theater of Easton and the Easton National Canal Museum. His contributions made children's lives better, raised appreciation for the arts in his community, and helped to preserve important local history.

As an immigrant to this country, Mr. Acopian was eternally grateful for the opportunities that had been afforded to him here. He showed that gratitude, in part, by providing $1 million towards the construction of the World War II Memorial in Washington D.C., that is right, $1 million to the World War II Memorial in Washington D.C. His generous donation was the single largest contribution to that fundraising effort.

I must tell a story, former Senator Bob Dole came to the Easton area several years ago and said that one day in front of a few hundred people he received a check for $1 million for the World War II Memorial. He picked up the phone and called this man, Mr. Acopian. He said, Mr. Acopian, this is very generous. Is there anything you would like because of this very generous gift? Mr. Acopian wanted anonymity. He said no, there is really nothing I want, Senator. After a few moments, he thought about it and said, Senator, there is actually one thing, Senator, I do want. He said, I would like to have a seat at the dedication. Bob Dole said, well, heck, yes, he can have mine. That is the way Sarkis Acopian was. He sought anonymity, but Bob Dole blew his cover.

His greatest passion, however, was for his lovely wife of 59 years, Mrs. Bobbye Seitze Mixon Acopian. Together the couple had two sons, Gregory, who is married to Karen; and Jeffrey, who is married to Helen, both of whom still reside in Easton. He is survived also by six grandchildren and two great grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I come here today not to speak about the great weighty issues of the day, whether it be Iraq or the budget process and procedures of the House, homeland security or any number of issues. No, Mr. Speaker, I come here today to talk about the career of a wonderful individual. You know, it was Tip O'Neill who once said that all politics is local, and I rise today to honor the career of one of our Nation's great local civic leaders, civic officials, Charlie Allebach, Jr.

Charlie has been serving the people of the Borough of Souderton, Pennsylvania, for almost 43 years. Let me say that again. That is for 43 years, he has served the people of Souderton, Pennsylvania. He first became a borough councilman in 1964--by the way, I was 4 years old at that time--he was appointed mayor in 1970, and he has been mayor ever since. But I just want you to know, too, that he has just announced his retirement.

Charlie has presided over the steady growth of a wonderful community, Souderton, Pennsylvania. If you don't know anything about Souderton, it is in the Indian Valley of Pennsylvania, Montgomery County. It has got a great tradition. The Mennonites have had an enormous influence on that area over the years, have deeply influenced the culture and tradition. There is a great sense of family and faith in that area. Souderton is an extraordinary community.

Charlie, also, I want you to know, has performed more than 2,400 marriage ceremonies, lent his time to local service organizations and has been devoted to the borough in every way imaginable.

On behalf of the people of the 15th Congressional District, I wish him the best during his retirement. We would like to keep him around in public office longer, but I understand that 40 years is a long time. We wish him the best in this richly deserved retirement.

I also ask that a copy of my remarks today be included in the Congressional Record so that Charlie Allebach, Jr.'s career as the mayor of Souderton can be memorialized within the annals of Congress for all time and to all the people in the Indian Valley in Souderton, I know that they are perhaps watching today the proceedings of the House and I know they have such a deep affection for this man. We don't spend enough time in our lives as Members of Congress thanking and celebrating people who do things right, who enter public service because they believe in advancing the best interests of their community. They are not doing it for themselves. That is what Charlie Allebach is all about.

So to Charlie, we say once again, thank you for a job well done. We hope to see you around. We know we will, but just want you to know that your contributions to all of us, to our community, are deeply appreciated and will not be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, Tip O'Neill once said that all politics is local, and I rise today to honor the career of one our nation's great local civic officials, Charlie Allebach, Jr.

Charlie has been serving the people of the Borough of Souderton, Pennsylvania, for almost 43--that's 43--years. He first became a borough councilman in 1964, and he was appointed mayor in 1970. He has been the mayor ever since, but he has just announced his retirement.

Charlie has presided over the steady growth of a wonderful community. He has also performed more than 2,400 marriage ceremonies, lent his time to local service organizations, and has been devoted to the Borough in every way.

On behalf of the people of the 15th Congressional District, I wish him the best during his retirement, and I ask that a copy of these remarks be included in the Congressional Record so that Charlie Allebach, Jr.'s career as the mayor of Souderton, Pennsylvania, can be memorialized within the annals of Congress for all time.

Thank you, Charlie, for a job well done.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, today rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying legislation. In this bill, the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner will be allowed to vote on proceedings in the Committee of the Whole; but if their vote is decisive, then there must be a revote in the full House without the participation of these Delegates. In other words, the bill says that your vote counts except when it doesn't count. And when it really, really counts, that is when it will make a difference in the outcome of the proceedings, it turns out that your vote doesn't count at all.

This kind of absurdity might be appropriate in the drama of Beckett or Ionesco, but it has no place in the making of American law.

And I do want to address the issue, too. In the last session I supported the Tom Davis-Holmes Norton bill to help deal with the issue of the District of Columbia's voting rights. I agree with that. I support that legislation, and we should take up that legislation. We shouldn't do it through this rule.

Also, with respect to self-determination in Puerto Rico, we have been supportive of Mr. Fortuno and his effort to allow for self- determination of the island where people have a choice to make: independence, territorial status, or statehood. Let that process take its course. This is not the way to go. I oppose the rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.

Although the purpose of this legislation is straightforward, the significance cannot be understated. H.R. 3 would expand the limited number of embryonic stem cell lines currently available for federally funded research. Permitting research on additional embryonic stem cell lines will advance a field that scientists agree holds the greatest potential to provide groundbreaking therapies for some of the most vexing diseases of our time.

I believe stem cell research, all forms of stem cell research, adult, cord blood, amniotic, embryonic, should be pursued. This discussion is not about a competition. The promise of stem cell research, to find treatments for the most devastating diseases like Parkinson's, juvenile diabetes, coronary heart diseases, cancer and spinal cord injuries, is too great not to explore every single possibility.

That said, embryonic stem cell research raises serious ethical questions that have been raised by some of my colleagues today. I strongly believe that H.R. 3 is the most responsible way to ensure that we are observing the highest possible standards of ethical and clinical practice by setting meaningful ethical guidelines for embryonic stem cell research that will serve as the benchmark for scientific study throughout the world. H.R. 3 provides these ethical guidelines.

First, in order to be considered for this research, the donated cells must come from an in vitro fertilization clinic, have been created for the purpose of fertility treatment and be in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking treatment.

Second, the in vitro facility has to certify that these cells would be otherwise discarded if not donated and that the cells are not destined for implantation.

Third, the donors of these cells have to sign a written consent form providing for such a donation and confirm that they have not received any inducements, financial or otherwise, to make the donation.

We took one important step last year in Congress in addressing these ethical dilemmas that are raised by this emerging field of science. We enacted a law which prohibits the practice of fetal farming where human fetal tissue would be deliberately created for the purpose of scientific research. H.R. 3 will take another step in ensuring that research is adhered to the highest possible principles of scientific inquiry and respects critical ethical boundaries while advancing some of the most critical research of our time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak of a courageous young man from my district, and of his friends and family and supporters, who are trying to use his untimely demise to help make the world a better place.

Derek Ryan Kehoe graduated from Nazareth High School in 2005, which this high school is located in Nazareth, Pennsylvania. And he was a star player on the school's basketball team, a team he led to the District 11 Tournament in 2005.

He was a freshman at Albright College when, in April of 2006, he discovered a lump on his back. The lump turned out to be leiomyosarcoma, or LMS as it is better known, a rare and deadly form of cancer. LMS currently has no cure. And though Derek was a strong, healthy 19-year-old, the disease overcame him, and he passed on on October 28, 2006.

Throughout his illness, Derek was cheerful and encouraging, more concerned with the feelings of those who came to see him than of his own condition. On January 5, 2007, Derek's life will be commemorated at half time of the Nazareth High-Northampton High boys basketball game. A full house is expected, and 150 of Derek's classmates are returning for the event. All proceeds from the game will be earmarked to fight this dreaded disease of LMS that took Derek away from us way too soon.

I want to extend my condolences to Derek's parents, Maureen Kehoe and Kevin Kehoe. I also want to express my support for all the people who have put together this event, including the Kehoes, the administration of Nazareth Area High School, and the Nazareth High School Booster Club. I also want to convey a special word of thanks to Nazareth basketball coach Joe Arndt, who loved Derek as he would a son and who played a key role in making this event a reality.

Mr. Speaker, I will insert a copy of these words into the Congressional Record this 4th day of January, 2007, as part of the effort to commemorate for all time the life of Derek Ryan Kehoe.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak of a courageous young man from my District, and of his friends, family, and supporters who are trying to use his untimely demise to help make the world a better place.

Derek Ryan Kehoe graduated from Nazareth High School in 2005 (in Nazareth, PA) and was a star player on the school's basketball team, a team he led to the District 11 Tournament in 2005. He was a freshman at Albright College when, in April of 2006, he discovered a lump on his back. The lump turned out to be leiomyosarcoma (LMS), a rare and deadly form of cancer. LMS currently has no cure, and though Derek was a strong, healthy 19-year old, the disease overcame him, and he passed on October 28, 2006.

Throughout his illness, Derek was cheerful and encouraging, more concerned with the feelings of those who came to see him than with his own condition. On January 5, 2007, Derek's life will be commemorated at the halftime of the Nazareth High-Northampton High boys basketball game. A full house is expected, and 150 of Derek's classmates are returning for the event. All proceeds from the game will be earmarked to fight this dreaded disease of LMS that took Derek away from us way too soon.

I want to extend my condolences to Derek's parents, Maureen Kehoe and Kevin Kehoe. I also want to express my support for all the people who have put together this event, including the Kehoes, the administration of Nazareth Area High School, and the Nazareth High Booster Club. I also want to convey a special word of thanks to Nazareth basketball coach Joe Arndt, who loved Derek as he would a son, and who played a key role in making this event a reality.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that a copy of these words be inserted into the Congressional Record this 4th day of January 2007, as part of the effort to commemorate, for all time, the life of Derek Ryan Kehoe.

Mr. Speaker, as a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I rise today to speak in favor of House Resolution 1082. When I first read or heard that the leadership of the Paris suburb of St. Denis had decided to name a street in that municipality for Mumia Abu-Jamal, I thought I had just disappeared down Lewis and Carroll's rabbit hole in Alice in Wonderland. Everything had gone topsy-turvy; left had become right, up was down, and, most significantly, right was now wrong.

Mumia Abu-Jamal is a man to be condemned, not honored. On December 9, 1981, he shot Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner. He shot him in the back, then he shot him four more times. The last round from a 38-caliber handgun struck the officer in the face and killed him. Four eyewitnesses at the scene saw him do it and testified as such in a court of law. Abu-Jamal was apprehended at the scene, and his 38, containing five spent shell casings, was found there as well. And I won't even get into the alleged hospital confession.

Abu-Jamal was tried by a jury of his peers in a Philadelphia courtroom. He was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death. Philadelphia's Democratic District Attorney Lynn Abraham called it ``the most open and shut murder case'' that she had ever seen. In fact, current Pennsylvania Democrat Governor Ed Rendell was district attorney at the time, and his office tried that case.

Abu-Jamal also admitted to shooting the officer. And while this confession and a death sentence that he received has been the subject of subsequent appeals, every court that has looked at this case has affirmed the jury's finding that Abu-Jamal murdered Officer Faulkner.

Abu-Jamal, a cop killer, is now feted as a minor celebrity by people like Fidel Castro, a few Hollywood movie stars, and of course the leadership of a small suburb of Paris, France. And some people have argued that they support Abu-Jamal because they oppose the death penalty. May I say, rather respectfully, that the Jamal case is not the case to make that case against the death penalty. We have a death penalty statute in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania precisely because of cases like this one.

The man that he executed, meanwhile, a true hero who protected and served the people of Philadelphia, is dead, and his widow Maureen continues to grieve for him. I have met with Maureen when I served in the Pennsylvania General Assembly. I know that she misses Danny every day. Only the Mad Hatter could make sense of a scenario like this.

Please, I urge every Member of this House to vote in favor of this resolution sponsored by my good friends and colleagues Mike Fitzpatrick and Allyson Schwartz.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the generous actions of National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, following the damaging affects of Hurricane Katrina on our nation's liquid hydrogen infrastructure.

On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast Region of the United States. In addition to the devastating impact that Hurricane Katrina levied on the residents and municipalities of the Gulf Coast Region, the storm also severely damaged numerous business and manufacturing establishments, including the world's largest liquid hydrogen manufacturing facility located in New Orleans, LA.

For 40 years, NASA has been a major user of liquid hydrogen for many of its programs, including its Space Shuttle program. Today, NASA remains a significant and preferential customer of the New Orleans liquid hydrogen facility and, as such, is entitled to preferential supply due to its Defense Priority rating.

Liquid hydrogen is essential in many commercial manufacturing applications including the production of metals, float glass and electronics products that are, in turn, critical resources for other major American manufactures.

In anticipation of the Space Shuttle launch scheduled for March 2006, NASA had accumulated a considerable amount of liquid hydrogen in its spheres at the Kennedy Space Center, and had also planned significant testing of the Space Shuttle engines at Stennis Space Center prior to the March launch.

Upon learning of the severe shortage of liquid hydrogen supply in North America due to the effects of Hurricane Katrina on the facility located in New Orleans, NASA voluntarily agreed to transfer back to the facility a total of 391,220 pounds of liquid hydrogen and agreed to ``stand down'' its engine testing requirements at Stennis Space Center until liquid hydrogen production was resumed in November 2005.

NASA's generous actions allowed for the continued, albeit reduced, supply of liquid hydrogen to most commercial customers across the United States and prevented the shutdown of numerous manufacturing facilities and commensurate job losses throughout the Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me today in recognizing NASA for its exceptional response and efforts in support of the U.S. manufacturing base by unselfishly committing its liquid hydrogen resources immediately following Hurricane Katrina's devastation ofthe Gulf Coast liquid hydrogen production capacity on August 29, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak in strong support of H.R. 5825, the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, for four reasons:

First, the act applies only to foreign agents operating in this country. It cannot be used to spy on ordinary Americans. It cannot be used in run-of-the-mill criminal prosecutions. It allows only short- term, let me repeat, short-term warrantless surveillance.

Second, the act makes it easier to conduct surveillance on those foreign agents. Up to now, their communications within this country could not be monitored without FISA approval if it was likely that U.S. citizens were involved in those communications.

Third, and most importantly, the Act makes it easier for us to respond to attack or to the threat of attack. Under current law, warrantless surveillance of foreign agents is permitted only after the U.S. has declared war. Waiting to monitor the activities of foreign terrorists until a formal declaration of war has been declared may be too late. Under H.R. 5825, we can begin such surveillance after an armed or terrorist attack has occurred or, even more significantly, when there is an imminent threat that is likely to cause death or widespread harm.

Finally, the Act gives intelligence authorities the flexibility needed to respond to emergency situations. Under current law, intelligence authorities may conduct surveillance in an emergency for up to 3 days before that agency must go to a FISA court for a warrant. Under H.R. 5825, that period is extended to 7 days, giving authorities more time to respond to that emergency and to gain valuable information that might save people's lives.

For all these reasons, I urge strong support for the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act.

And, finally, I would like to say maybe, maybe, had this technology been employed before 9/11, maybe those two terrorists out in San Diego who were on the phones to Yemen into a switchboard, a switchboard apparently that bin Laden himself had called into one time, maybe had we been doing this type of surveillance, maybe we could have prevented at least one of those attacks that occurred at the Pentagon on September 11.

For all these reasons, I strongly support the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in strong support of the HOPE VI Reauthorization Act of 2006, H.R. 5347.

This program does play a vital role in the redevelopment of severely dilapidated public housing units and promotes self-sufficiency among the residents of the community. HOPE VI projects forge new relationships and partnerships between local businesses and development agencies, garnering growth and investment in poverty stricken neighborhoods.

In May, 2005, the Allentown Housing Authority, located in my district, received $20 million from this program for the redevelopment and revitalization of the Hanover Acres and Riverview Terrace public housing facilities. Once complete, the project will provide 322 new housing units and a community center for families, as well as adult education services, youth programs, child care, and homeownership and money management education programs for residents.

Because of this investment, families will have increased opportunities for education, job skills, training, and job placement. This HOPE VI project is not only crucial to Hanover Acres but ultimately a catalyst for the revitalization of the entire community and neighborhood.

The HOPE VI program has already facilitated the redevelopment of 80,000 housing units across the Nation. However, there are approximately 60,000 units still in desperate need of revitalization. Each revitalization project we undertake across the country will undoubtedly provide crucial economic stability for countless children and families through housing, community centers, and educational services.

I believe it is crucial that we continue to provide the means for revitalization of our most distressed neighborhoods and the opportunity for families and children to prosper in secure

surroundings. I ask that my colleagues vote in favor of the HOPE VI Reauthorization Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in favor of H.R. 4893, the Restricting Indian Gaming to Homelands of Tribes Act of 2006.

The expansion of tribal casinos to lands whose connection to Native American culture is limited or attenuated at best. This is a growing problem throughout the United States. No one wants to deny Native Americans the right to pursue government recognition of their tribal connections and to celebrate their native cultures.

Increasingly, however, groups anxious to promote casino gambling have aligned with some Native American groups for the sole purpose of utilizing the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, IGRA, to promote the establishment of casinos.

In my district, the Delaware Nation, which is headquartered in Oklahoma, has filed suit in Federal court to establish title to a 315- acre tract of land in Northampton County, Pennsylvania, so it can build a gambling facility. More than 25 families live on this property. It is also home to the Binney and Smith Company, on which it has placed a Crayola crayon manufacturing facility. The individuals trying to establish this casino, who all reside out-of-State, are not concerned about the area's homeowners, about the valuable manufacturing jobs potentially displaced by this casino, or about the fact that Binney and Smith's Crayola makes a useful product loved by children all over the world.

They are only interested in seeing working people and seniors gamble away their hard-earned dollars. H.R. 4983 would effectively end this kind of reservation shopping. It prohibits gambling on Indian lands outside of the State in which that tribe is primarily residing and exercising tribal authority as of the date of this law's enactment, unless those lands are contiguous to lands currently overseen and occupied by that tribe.

This prevents a tribe with headquarters, in, say, California or Oklahoma from acquiring lands in places like Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania, where there are no federally recognized Indian tribes, for the sole purpose of putting a casino on those properties.

Homeowners and business owners should not be held hostage to out-of- state casino interests that are willing to throw people out of their homes and destroy local businesses in order to further the expansion of casino gambling.

I would ask for all Members to support H.R. 4893.